Pages

Monday, November 16, 2015

Did You Know All These Insane Facts About Bigfoot?

This video shares 20 supposed facts about bigfoot. I'm not sure how many of these are true or not, or if anyone knows anything factual about bigfoot at all. But these items are still interesting, so check them out:

Hell ya Iktomi, I'm so tired of that guy. And 8:22, are you lost?? Do you know where you are? This is a sasquatch enthusiast website. And the fact that you are CONSTANTLY on here says two things, one is that you're pretty pathetic and two you don't have a life beyond stirring stuff up on sasquatch related forums. Go find someone who actually enjoys your company. For someone who believes this topic is a complete joke you're on this website more than anyone else I've noticed. Your arrogance and ignorance never ceases to amaze me. How about you look at all the evidence that this subject has to offer OBJECTIVELY, if you could handle not being such a tool, and then draw your own conclusion. You more than likely let the media and social experiences influence your thinking and most definitely your opinion on this topic

Come on Danny, you self admittedly trolled this site for years... Don't come out all "holier than thou" now. Anyway... We used to have some good exchanges, don't take things so personally. You used to be thicker skinned, the people you upset along the way have let it go, try and do the same.

look at Joe suckin up to daniel. I think he wants to be your friend daniel. This shows just how much of a pu$$y Joe really is. Daniel destroyed you daily Joe, and he still does with replies like this. Now, suck up to daniel some more. Maybe if you agree to show him your man boobs, he may come back for a little while.

The funniest thing about all this Joe, is that you regularly try and get daniel to engage you in debate or even insults. Which your reply above shows. You have used this same reply about "the bet" time and time again over the past year, hoping to get daniel to show you the time of day. And the truly funny part about it, is that daniel just ignores you each and every time. And it drives you nuts! So much so,, that you have resorted to trying to kiss up to him now. He doesnt like you Joe, and wants nothing to do with you. Get over it. Hes not coming back, so no need to lick his backside. No matter how much "bet" comments you make, he slams you time and time again by simply remaining silent. And its halarious for trolls like me. Dmaker is largely ignoring you now too and you cant stand it. Seeing a post by daniel on this site sets your loins on fire more than any woman could. Speaking of seeing, do you remember when you got tricked into looking at a pic of daniels testicles! Its over Joe, its over. Daniel is gone and he buried you in every possible way.

you saw it joe, and it made you so mad that you started calling daniel a pervert/pedophile for posting it here as his avatar. Then you made comments about it being small. Funny you never saw it, but described it so well.

Negative proof fallacy; When it is claimed or implied that, because a premise cannot be proven false, the premise must be true, or that, because a premise cannot be proven true, the premise must be false.

Facts;And while there is evidence to support anecdotes, you must shift that heavy burden. The people who make a mint of "Bigfoot", account for "debunkers" trying to help children like you sleep better at night.

Monkey suits exist... Whole databases of suit making and fur cloth techniques by award winning professionals spanning over 100 years, therefore the data is not lacking and not a negative. If data exists, it can be tested.

Hello...I'm an award winning professional suit maker whose fur cloth technique took 100s of years to fill up your modern data bases. In case you've forgotten, and clearly by your trolling of me in recent prior posts, you have, along with most everything else you've been told, including the potential side effects of your morning meds, I must tell you that Iktomi is, as per usual .....correct....you are with adults here. And as Uncle Ben Parker told Peter, right before he was shot, "with great power comes great responsibility". Now I've got to go, somewhere out there, the thread count on my latest creation is potentially in jeopardy. As Stan Lee said and DSA read....."Nuff Said"

4:01... Not when YOUR premise, the idea that the subject in the PGF is NOT organic tissue, needs to be tested. If I was presenting the premise that you "cannot prove that the subject in that footage is not real, therefore Sasquatch exists", then your nonsense would apply but the subject is a negative, and could have died out since. Now, for my premise in saying that the subject in that footage is genuinely organic, I have methods such as surface anatomy, SFX and plastic surgery to test that notion. Those areas are not negative... And as a result, I have a long line of experts endorsing my stance. See how this works?

Again, I will try and walk you through the most BASIC of comments; monkey suits exist. Now go lift that burden.

LOL. You are saying that because someone doesn't perfectly recreate a Patterson costume, then the Patterson subject must be a real bigfoot. That's the whole basis of your often used got monkey suit line.

That is exactly your "because the premise cannot be proven false, the premise must be true..." negative fallacy argument. You're saying that, if you can't prove that "Patty" was a costume by accurately recreating the monkey suit, then "Patty" is a real bigfoot. How is that not saying that because you cannot prove the premise is false, then the premise must be true.

Oh that's right, you only hear what you want to hear and believe what you want to believe.

I know you thought you were clever, and you're trying very desperately to hang on to this, but allow me to put it to bed...

No... What I want are the basic requirements of scientific debate, and that means reinforcing your stance with data. Monkey costumes are not a negative, they exist, we know they exist and we have innumerable examples of SFX techniques to draw from in trying to support your premise. That is your burden since it is you that is maintaining that the subject is not organic, test it, you do this my showing how it could have been achieved.

Again... One can only use the available data. The exchange here is not about the existence of Sasquatch, I cannot use that source to promote the idea that Sasquatch is alive and breathing today, for that I would need a body and that body is a negative at this point. What I can use that source for, by means of testing and falsifiability, is state that the creature is indeed organic because YOU fail at proving your premise that it is a suit, and by means of professional scientific opinion that has yet to be tested to be false.

It's very, very simple. If data exists, it can be tested. And yes... By all means of testing that the subject cannot be shown to be inorganic, and by professional opinion in support of that... I win and you my dear, dense nerd, lose.

Ahhhhhh Iktomi, my fellow coconspirator and frequent collaborator..... I have gotten to Ozark Deer Camp and have given up on all the trappings of modern society and gone "off the grid". I'm currently accessing this website from an old IBM Clock Radio hooked up to a dial up Ford bag phone that I stole ten years ago from Matt Knapp. But it's good to see school is still in session, and therefore DSA should show some respect, as clearly Iktomi and I are truly Old School Footers. Why not too awful long ago I gave Iktomi a list to give Albert Ostman: "hardtack, fatback, hardfat....and extra coffee and DONT forget the snuff". Then, as we got older and quit trapping and gold mining to take permanent employment, how could I forget yelling at him from the top of my Trackhoe "you tell Jerry Crew I can't get anything done out here with all these barefoot California Hippies trampling up my job site" After hiring DeAtley to defend me from ridiculous accusations merely because I walked my harnessed dog near a suspicious blood red pool, Iktomi and I took to the woods with seasoned researchers. One day I asked him to tell Matt Moneymaker and the other team members as I grew fatigued to "go on ahead, I'm just gonna stretch out in this muddy meadow and chew on this elk shank". You see DSA, not all the history of this Subject matter is exactly as you would relay it. So, as I don my safety orange hunting chaps, i want to wish everyone at BFE, especially you DSA with your safety helmet and red rifle BB Gun, a safe and happy hunting and holiday season. But Be Careful........"you'll shoot yer eye out kid"

There is no point highlighting Iktomi's hypocritical stance anon (which by definition, it is). He never admits when he's wrong. The whole 'got monkey suit' IS an example of negative proof fallacy, however embarassing for him that that is. He patently lies when telling you it isn't.

no one has recreated the Patterson suit because it wasn't a suit. We will never convince skeptics no matter what unless you shove a bigfoot body in their face and even then they'll probably say it's Hollywood SFX

3:46... Argh yes! That's right... Flr thousand of years, there has been a culture hopping secret society of gorilla suit wearing conspirators all out to get your money. These people, though finding each others customs undesirable, and spanning from a time when they didn't even know what an ape looked like, have in fact managed to cheat the best experts with fake biological species traits that span decades and States, in lottery win fashion too.

No. The negative proof fallacy has nothing to do with whether monkey suits exists - that isn't the point of conjecture. The assertion is that the Patterson bigfoot must be real because you don't have the specific suit that was used. That's the negative proof. Twist it all you like, but that's a succinct example of the theory. You are incapable of admitting wrong. That is your downfall. But whatever, call me names like you did before because you cant address the justified criticism.

Nwah, look at little old you trying so hard to hold on to something you thought you got clever about, I really am starting to feel a little sorry for you, so I'll oblige you just one more time, only because my cruel streak outweighs my sympathetic side. Forget about me a minute... Don't worry about what my premise is for a spilt second, let's worry about your stance as yours and mine are two different angles... Ok... You with me? You sure??

If data exists, it can be tested, it is not a negative. The footage is data and it certainly exists, it is therefore not a negative source and can be tested, there is no room for mere assumption on its existence. To suggest that the subject in that footage is a costume, we know monkey suits are not a negative source, there is no requirement to assume either way that monkey suits exist, there is data to reference in a 100 years of costume methods. By this, you must test that premise against the available falsifiable data. And how does one test the idea that the subject in that footage is a man in a monkey suit? That's right... You can do it!! You know it!!

Now... To assume that one is correct in the premise both for or against the existence of Sasquatch would be to adhere to negative proof fallacies. We don't have a body, therefore the data is none existent and there is room to assume either way. I find it rich that for my alleged "downfalls", you can't seem to keep up with the most basic of logical concepts. Names? Nwah... Are you going to go tell everyone how nasty people on a Bigfoot blog are to you now? Be sure to let them know of this very blog link, maybe they can hold your hand through the big words too.

Phillip Morris has been making bigfoot suits and fooling people for hundreds of years. I'll bet he's one of those immortal warlocks perhaps even a vampire.That's right, people have been using gorilla suits and fooling natives for hundreds of years and that is funny because gorillas were not known to science since the early 20th century . of course it could be that bigfoot is real but skeptical trolls would rather eat their fruit loops through a straw than agree with that premise

Hah, my god the delusion is glorious! Your retort is unrelated semantics and meandering. I know bogging down discussion to deflect from the real issue is your game, but I'll bite, for now.

All that patronising stuff about the video being data is pointless. That's established. The real issues is you don't think suit techniques allow for a functioning suit capable of Patterson. Yet people like Stan Winston, a special effects genius who worked in the industry his whole life, judged it possible (cue your canned response 'he didn't study it long enough!' special pleading, as if you had any idea what capacity he studied it in, Munns etc). But again, this is beside the point. It's all conjecture at the end of the day.

Muddy the discussion all you like - the negative proof construct applies to you too. Can't produce the suit ≠ no suit = negative proof fallacy. That was the original point of conjecture: your catchphrase, which IS hypocritical. You know it deep down. Scurry some more.

And I'm warning you DSA. Do not chide us from you basement "comfort bunker" surrounded by all your childhood 'Star Wars' memorabilia and old Parker Brothers games that your mother's sentimentality stacked and saved to honor you . Please remember that a long time ago, in a galaxy far..far away....long before you suited up in you 'Darth Maul' outfit for prequel screenings .... that it was the old schoolers like us who "did it all for the Wookie"

5:10. The only meds I take are Barley, Yeast. Rice, Hopps and Water. You are probably familiar with yeast ...at least. Now let's all allow good natured deer hunting and holiday wishes to go off without your usual sandbox level attempts at cynical rancor. Where I live a city boy like you is referred to as a "whistle britches" ;)

Now, lean close in Anon....as these are my specific holiday wishes for you. Send me your email address. I'll send you a video of my upcoming fall trip with Stacy Brown Jr of Sasquatch Hunters and Brandon "Machete" Garett, after we spend a week this fall at a remote location researching an area I've purposely avoided to let "cool." And maybe then you will begin to understand. "It takes a thief to catch a thief" and the best way to interact with or capture evidence of Wild Primates or Humans is to send in a similar crew of your own.

You sound pretty confident on your upcoming fall trip Mike. Why not just post the video right here showing all of us your results? I'm sure we will all anxiously await your evidence. I do hope it's more impressive than what you have produced so far though.

Iktomi I really don't know why you bother with this guy. He hears what he wants to hear. He, like most of man, believes we've found everything there is to find and know everything there is to know. These accounts go back THOUSANDS of years, across the world with all these people describing basically the same animal. I guess he like most others are likely to believe the more farfetched theory of this being the MOST elaborate and longest hoax in the history of our existence, which means the thousands among thousands of people who've reported their accounts not mentioning all the people that don't report their sightings are all apparently lying and you'd have to ask yourself if you believe this ridiculous theory is what would be the end game of that and what are they trying to accomplish? Or the more realistic option is that these animals are truely out there and have been longer than we could comprehend

Mike B sure does think he's pretty awesome. If Itkomi wants to swallow your baby batter you must be a complete flog. There's more chance of Itkomi finding his d ick under his fat guts than Mike B finding Bigfoot.

2:11... You are totally spot on pal. The reason I bother with clowns like that is pretty simple, I love using them as the average ignorant's point of view, and even showing how backward in thinking that view is.

HAHAHAHAHA. You fell for it again lktomi Joe. Its me, 2:11. Lol, you are too easy to mess with. And by the way i cant stand you, so i dont care if you like my comments or not. And ive got a bunch more coming your way. HAHAHA

By the way... If you're going to try and take credit for other people's comments, at least get your grammar in check, you silly little psycho-racist nerd. http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/online-trolls-are-psychopaths-and-sadists-psychologists-claim-9134396.html

8:25...my dear, my darling, sentence enhancers, be they adjective or adverb, do not define a persons sexuality. For Example, it's a miracle you learned to speak German while sitting on your Uncle's knee watching Shiza porn. And they said the video stream as a medium couldn't teach .....

*. Footnote on homosexuality to the homophobe above: no...DSA, I'm not gay. But you sure like to TOSS homosexual gay bashing banter about casually. Like you did to your larger juvenile detention "friend" your mother liked so much that you brought home after bible camp a few holidays back. I'm simply a bipedal oppotunistrtc omnivore surviving on what meager calories I can obtain to sustain myself. But make no mistake, im Not cocky. Sure, I am confident. Because as an Ozark Jedi....the force is calling to me....but you and I differ in our species . And you do know what Predators do to scavengers right? Watch "Lions and Hyenas, Eternal Enemies" and finally grasp that I am the big cat and you are the whimpering hyena whose tail shows submission as he cackles off into the labyrinth of the vast plains (of his mother's duplex).

I'd like to apologize to the following people: Gerhard Reinke, Platinum Level Cryptozooligist with +12 charisma. DSA, DSA's mother who brought us that wonderful snack between meals with juice boxes, Matt Knapp and Shawn E. I had no right to say those awful things that were whited out. I promise to do 30 hours community service cleaning up the SOHA portal entrance when time allows. Now, if I can change. I'm hoping Anon can too. But I don't want him to get his "friend" to hold his breath on that just yet.

DSA. "You used to call me on the cell phone. Late night when you need my love. Call me on the cell phone. Late night when you need my love, and I know when that hotline bling....that it means just one thing....ya I know when that hotline bling that it means just one thing ...." DSA. A famous straight man once said:...."My best friends were gay, and my gay friends were best...." Yet .. I am still seeing a girl as we speak. So...I am sadly hetero..yet your position on that Subject, which I consider case closed.., makes me truly sad.....so u can "call me on your cellphone....late night ...when you need..."